Below we quote, with abbreviations, a letter from the
R.S.D.L.P. representative:

“London, Feb. 14, 1915.

“It was only last night that I received from the secretary of the
British section of the International the address of the Conference, this in
reply to my letter, in which I informed him of my address, without asking
for an invitation. I decided to go there so as to try to read the
declaration. Present were: from the Socialist-Revolutionaries, Rubanovich
(from the social-chauvinists), Chernov and Bobrov from Mysi; Maisky from the
Organising Committee, he being delegated together with Martov, who failed to
appear, as he had received no pass. There were eleven delegates from Britain
(Keir Hardie as Chairman, MacDonald and others); sixteen from France
(Sembat, Vaillant and others); three from Belgium (Vandorvelde and
others).

“The Chairman opened the Conference by declaring that its aim was
to exchange opinions, not to adopt resolutions. A French delegate proposed
an amendment, asking why a resolution should not be passed registering the
opinion of the majority. This was accepted without discussion.

“The agenda: (1) the rights of nations-Belgium and Poland; (2)
colonies; (3) guarantees of peace. A Credentials Committee was elected
(Rubanovich and others). It was decided that one representative from each
country should make a brief report on the attitude to the war.

“I took the floor and protested against the failure to invite our
Party’s official representative in the International Socialist Bureau
[Comrade
Maximovich,[2] who has for over a year been a mem ber of the
I. S. Bureau as representative
of our Party, and is permanently resident in
London]. The Chairman interrupted me, referring to the invitation of all
‘whose names are known’. I once more protested against the
failure to inform the genuine representatives. Then I referred to our
Manifesto [see Sotsjal-Dernokrat No. 33, “The War and Russian
Social-Democracy”[1]
],
which shows our over-all attitude towards the
war, and has been sent to the I. S. Bureau. Prior to speaking of the
conditions of peace, I said, it was necessary to establish the means by
which we would endeavour to achieve peace; with that end, the existence of a
general revolutionary Social-Democratic basis should be ascertained, and
also whether we were conferring as chauvinists, as pacifists, or as
SocialDemocrats. I was reading our declaration, but the Chairman interrupted
me, declaring that my standing as a delegate had not yet been established
[!] and that they had gathered, ‘not for criticism of various
parties’ [!]. I stated that I would continue my speech after the
report of the Credentials Committee. [The text of the declaration we were
not allowed to read appears in the next issue.]

“Brief statements on the general situation were made by Vaillant,
V.andervelde, MacDonald, and Ruhanovich. Then, following the report of the
Credentials Committee, Maisky was asked to himself decide whether he could
alone represent the Organising Committee, and I was “permitted”
to attend. I thanked the Conference for their “courtesy” and was
about to continue reading out the declaration so as to ascertain whether I
could remain, The Chairman interrupted me, saying he would not allow me to
present “conditions” to the Conference. Then I asked for
permission to say why I would not take part in the Conference. This
was rejected. I then asked for permission to state that the R.S.D.L.P. was
not taking part in the Conference. As for the reasons, I was leaving a
written statement with the Chairman. I gathered my papers and left ....

“The Chairman was given a statement from the Chairman of the
Central Committee of the Lettish Social-Democrats [Berzinj to the effect
that he fully agreed with our declaration.”

The delegates to the Conference were not allowed to give any information
to the press. This, of course, did not apply to Comrade Maximovich’s
leaving the Conference, and the Labour
Leader,[3] in which Keir Hardie
collaborates, made some general comments on Maximovich’s having left
the Conference and on his point of view.

Owing to lack of space, we shall have to deal with the London Conference
and its resolutions in our next issue. We shall however note the utter
uselessness of its resolutions, which merely cover up social-chauvinism.

The following is the set-up of the Russian representation: the Central
Committee and the Lettish Social-Democrats are resolutely and clearly
opposed to social-chauvinism. The liquidators’ Organising Committee
either stay away or else get in the way. As for the
Socialist-Revolutionaries the “party” (Rubanovich) is for
social-chauvinism, while Mysl (Bobrov and Chernov) form the
opposition, which we shall give an appraisal of when we learn the kind of
statement they have made.

Notes

[3]Labour
Leader—a weekly published since 1891; since 1893, organ of the
Independent Labour Party of Briain. As from 1922, the newspaper appeared
under the name New Leader and in 1946 it became the Socialist
Leaders.